May 19, 2010
— Ace That's how I read him, at least.
Everything negative he says here of the Tea Party can be said with equal force of Democrats-- but of course he would never say negative things about the Democrats.
THE RIGHT-WING populist Tea Party movement has politicians of both parties spooked. Democrats fear it will bring so many Republicans to the boil, and then to the voting booth, that they will lose control of Congress....
A Harris poll released the last day of March reported that a third of all adults support the Tea Party, and slightly less than a quarter oppose it. Do they know what they are supporting, or opposing? The movement is not yet united on a single platform or agenda, like Newt GingrichÂ’s 1994 Contract With America, which started as a triumph and ended as an embarrassment. The lack of specifics allows anyone who is just existentially fed up (and who isnÂ’t, on some days?) to feel right at home. No one will demand to know what he or she is fed up with.
Any political party is an amalgamation of different interests, some utterly contradictory -- Muslims have flocked to the Democrats over the War on Terror and Republican support for Israel, which puts them at odds with Jews who have long called the leftward party home.
So -- what foreign policy does someone vote for when he votes Democratic?
Does Kinsley know? Does he even care any more? Do the Democrats even bother to clarify themselves on this point?
I suppose he's saying the Tea Party is more amorphous than a centralized political party, not that the Democrats are perfectly clear about their agenda and the Tea Party perfectly unsettled. To which I'd reply, 1) No, the Tea Party is just as clear as anyone, and 2) Even if it weren't, it's expected that a leaderless movement would be a little fuzzy. Without leadership and heirarchy and rules about membership, you can't ever enforce a party line.
On Web sites and in speeches, Tea Party Patriots reveal a fondness for procedural gimmicks (like a ban on congressional earmarks), constitutional amendments (term limits, balanced budget), and similar magic tricks or shortcuts to salvation. Apart from a general funk, though, the one common theme espoused by TPPs is the monstrous danger of Big Government.
Ah, so they do have a definable agenda: You just don't like it.
The Tea Party movement has been compared (by David Brooks of The New York Times, among others) to the student protest movement of the 1960s. Even though one came from the left and the other from the right, both are/were, or at least styled themselves as, a mass challenge to an oppressive establishment. ThatÂ’s a similarity, to be sure. But the differences seem more illuminating.First, the 1960s (shorthand for all of the political and social developments we associate with that period) were by, for, and about young people. The Tea Party movement is by, for, and about middle-aged and old people (undoubtedly including more than a few who were part of the earlier movement too). If young people discover a cause and become a bit overwrought or monomaniacal, thatÂ’s easily forgiven as part of the charm of youth. When adults of middle age and older throw tantrums and hold their breath until they turn blue, itÂ’s less charming.
I think perhaps Kinsley's determination of the anti-war movement as being "charming" might have something to do with finding it generally amicable to his own liberal politics.
I point out that Kinsley's thesis here is that Tea Party isn't merely a movement he doesn't like -- that will certainly cause no surprises among his fans or his critics -- but that the party is objectively malformed and malfunctioning according to objective criteria. He tries dressing it up that way, but in the end, when it's time to actually put coin in the piggybank, he resorts, again and again, to a simple statement of I don' like 'em.
Well, bully for you.
Second, although the 1960s ultimately spread their tentacles throughout the culture and around the world, politically there was just one big issue: ending the war in Vietnam. No such issue unites the Tea Party Patriots. You might guess from some of their materials on the Web that the repeal of health-care reform is the TPPsÂ’ Vietnam, their towering cause. But even for devoted TPPs, stripping health insurance away from people whoÂ’ve just gotten it is unlikely to summon the same passions that the activists of the 1960s brought to stopping a misguided war.
Again he resorts to a mere policy preference which he costumes and masquerades as some fundamental deficiency in intellectual rigor. He's decided that doing the evil thing (taking away fake government health insurance) isn't as passionate a cause as doing the good thing (stopping a war).
He offers no reason, apart from a liberal bent, why one of those goals is laudable and proper and the other is simply spleen dressed up in policy garb.
Not only do TPPs not have one big issue like Vietnam—they disagree about many of their smaller issues. What unites them is a more abstract resentment, an intensity of feeling rather than any concrete complaint or goal.
I seem to remember a shitload of "abstract resentment" and "intensity of feeling" on display among those anti-war activists -- who generally were activists for a whole smograstborg of trendy radical posture-politics -- than Kinsley seems willing to admit here.
He is attempting -- seriously attempting -- to cast the 70s Free Love Radical Shouters (and Bomb-Throwers) in the roles of Serious Political Therorists United Between One Tangible Goal.
Unless my television is lying to me -- and, Praise God, it never does -- my takeaway of the late-60s/early-70s hippie freakshow was inchoate rage at being young, privileged, and wealthy, and therefore in favor a stinky melange of goofball fashion choices maquerading as politics.
No nukes, free love, F--- the Pigs, communes, smash the state, Acid Messianism, end capitalism, Hippie-version Christianity, burn your bra, rob banks for the Palestinian cause... all of this and more was part of that pissed-off-at-their-parents rabble that Kinsley is attempting to cast as very disciplined and rational an serious-minded about one big issue.
The antiwar movement also worked, sort of. As did the civil-rights movement that preceded it. Antiwar protests ultimately turned the establishment itself against the war, though extracting us from it still took years. By contrast, the Tea Party Patriots, I predict, are just the flavor of the month: the kind of story that the media are incapable of not exaggerating. The antiwar movement and the 1960s changed America in numerous ways forever. The Tea Party Patriots will be an answer on Jeopardy or a crossword-puzzle clue.
Again, attempting to demonstrate how awful and unserious the Tea Party is, he resorts to mere opinion -- here, a prediction they'll be unsuccessful.
A final difference: although the 1960s featured plenty of self-indulgence, this wasnÂ’t their essence.
Did he just claimed that pampered brats who want to fuck and smoke pot were not essentially self-indulgent? But were rather quite serious young men and women?
I think he did.
Unlike those joy-riding bong-blowing Good-Time-Charlie Tea Partiers, as you'll soon discover.
Their essence was selfless and idealistic: stopping the war; ending racism; eradicating poverty. These goals and some of the methods for achieving them may have been childishly romantic or even entirely wrongheaded, but they were about making the world a better place.
It was selfless and idealistic for a draft-aged man to want stop the war he was about to be drafted into?
Note that I don't need to claim that such a man was wrong. Most believe the Vietnam War was a mistake (either from the get-go, or in insufficient and feckless prosecution), and I don't want to litigate that case.
But he's claiming that it was "selfless" for a man -- let's say a man like Michael Kinsely, born in 1951, who would have been 17 and of draftable age during the Tet Offensive and through the subsequent years of escalation -- to oppose the war.
Selfless? He had no self-interest whatsoever in taking this position?
Really?
And "idealistic"? This was idealism only - the war was only an abstraction for him? There was no... say... tangible, concrete benefit that would accrue to him if the war were ended before his draft number came up?
Can Michael Kinsley not remember back to his 17th year? Is he quite certain he opposed the war purely on abstract, idealistic grounds?
I am making a big deal about this because he wishes to contrast his own "selfless idealism" with the Tea Party's lousy mercenary self-interest:
The Tea Party movement’s goals, when stated specifically, are mostly self-interested. And they lack poetry: cut my taxes; don’t let the government mess with my Medicare; and so on. I say “self-interested” and not “selfish” because pursuing your own self-interest is not illegitimate in a capitalist democracy. (Nor is poetry an essential requirement.) But the Tea Party’s atmospherics, all about personal grievance and taking umbrage and feeling put-upon, are a far cry from flower power. There is a nasty, sour, vindictive tone to the Tea Party that certainly existed in the antiwar movement and its offspring, but never dominated the atmosphere created by these groups.
Right. Well, Mikey, what you see as "selfless idealism" in, say, the millions of people gettin' paid by the federal government I see as naked self-interest. They want other people's money and have decided they can vote themselves it.
So I don't see that as you do, as all selflessly idealistic 'n shit. I see it as people gettin' paid out of other people's wages.
And I see the people whose wages are being taken as having a legitimate -- dare I say more legitimate? -- gripe about keeping their own.
You see, in the land of liberals like Kinsley, there's nothing whatsoever selfish or self-interested about millions of people voting themselves a raise in the form of health-insurance paid out of someone else's pocket.
But the moment those whose pockets have suddenly become lighter utter a peep of objection, it's time to start talking about "selfless idealism" versus a "nasty, sour, vindictive" feeling.
Like a mugger might selflessly, idealistically take my wallet, and then, having gotten the attention of a cop, I might, with a nasty, sour, vindictive sort of feeling, ask that at least get to keep the credit cards.
We will soon be learning that the Tea Party is also pretty stupid, because we think that we can balance the budget simply by cutting small-potatoes programs like the NEA or foreign aid or eliminating pork.
Some of us do think that -- and yes, some people aren't as up as they could be on budget math, or at least don't wish to understand the full dimensions of the problem.
And this makes the average Tea Partier different from the average Democrat in what way...? The average Democrat who thinks all we have to do is "tax the rich" and "end the war" and wait for Obama's 10% growth per year Era of Prosperity to wipe out the deficit?
It's true that many people believe that great goals can be accomplished with little pain -- and they believe that primarily because their politicians tell them that every day. And it's true, as Kinsley says, that Tea Party slogans often fail to recognize how much budgetary pain is on the horizon.
But before I decide, with him, that the Tea Party is more uninformed than most of the public, I really need him to point out the average Democrat in the middle class who actually understands that his taxes are going up -- and significantly so, not by just an ooch here or there -- to pay for all of the liberals' "selfless idealism."
...“Personal responsibility” has been a great conservative theme in recent decades, in response to the growth of the welfare state. It is a common theme among TPPs—even in response to health-care reform, as if losing your job and then getting cancer is something you shouldn’t have allowed to happen to yourself. But these days, conservatives far outdo liberals in excusing citizens from personal responsibility. To the TPPs, all of our problems are the fault of the government, and the government is a great “other,” a hideous monster over which we have no control. It spends our money and runs up vast deficits for mysterious reasons all its own. At bottom, this is a suspicion not of government but of democracy. After all, who elected this monster?
Um, the current government? Liberals elected it, and people deceived by liberals.
This is nonsense on stilts. The Tea Party is trying to get the government under control, to which Kinsley says neener-neener, you elected it! Which isn't really true, and even it were, people are allowed to repudiate past bad votes.
This kind of talk is doubly self-indulgent. First, itÂ’s just not true. Second, itÂ’s obviously untrue. The governmentÂ’s main function these days is writing checks to old people. These checks allow people to retire and pursue avocations such as going to Tea Party rallies.
You're going to see more of this sneer -- The government is paying you your money so of course you have the time to take off to go to tea parties.
Which is an odd thing for him to say, since he's not questioning where all those people showing up in favor of Obama are getting their free time from.
Students, union hacks paid out of coerced dues, the indigent... Odd for him to suddenly discover the principle that if you're getting money from the government, you ought not to be making demands on it!
I think I could live with that principle -- but could he?
And, by the way, the government is "writing checks to old people" who have paid money into the system for their entire lives, from their first ice-cream shop job at age 15.
How much did Obama's new health insurees pay into the system before getting all complainey?
This basic fact about the government is no great secret. In fact, it’s a huge cliché, robably available more than once in an average day’s newspaper. But the Tea Party Patriots feel free to ignore it and continue serving up rhetoric about “the audaciousness and arrogance of our government,” and calling for the elimination of the Federal Reserve Board or drastic restraints on the power of the Internal Revenue Service.“I like what they’re saying. It’s common sense,” a random man-in-the-crowd told a Los Angeles Times reporter at a big Tea Party rally. Then he added, “They’ve got to focus on issues like keeping jobs here and lowering the cost of prescription drugs.” These, of course, are projects that can be conducted only by Big Government. If the Tea Party Patriots ever developed a coherent platform or agenda, they would lose half their supporters.
...
What is most irksome about the Tea Party Patriots is their expropriation of the word patriot, with the implication that if you disagree with them, youÂ’re not a patriot, or at least youÂ’re less patriotic than they are. Without getting all ask-notty about it, I think a movement labeling itself patriotic should have some obligation to demonstrate patriotism in a way other than demanding a tax cut.
Yes, similar to how many on the left demonstrate their patriotism by demanding increased student loans, welfare, etc.
Again, it's only a bad thing when you want to keep some of your own money.
In their rhetoric, the Tea Party Patriots do not sound as if they love their country very much: they have nothing but gripes. Yes, of course, these are gripes against the government, not against the country itself. But that distinction becomes hard to maintain when you have nothing good to say about the government and nothing but whines to offer the country.
Again, a very strange charge from Kinsley -- the right has often pointed out that while the left claims to be "patriotic," they are forever criticizing America itself in savage terms -- and it has been pointed out that if someone attempted to claim to his wife that endless criticism and slander was the way he "showed his love," that wife wouldn't take too much solace in that.
But after years of making the case that such "dissent" was the "highest form of patriotism" -- that the greatest love of country is expressed by those who criticize it -- Kinsley decides to reverse field and start calling it unpatriotic.
Once again: It's only bad when you do it.
Posted by: Ace at
04:46 PM
| Comments (262)
Post contains 2803 words, total size 17 kb.
Posted by: Noel at May 19, 2010 04:51 PM (Hh13R)
Posted by: O'Blammo at May 19, 2010 04:52 PM (PCUu5)
Michael Kinsely's greatest claim to fame was when David Duke called him a worm on the CNN show Crossfire.
Kinsley looked at Duke and said "you called me a worm?"
Duke answer: Yes, you're a worm!
Posted by: Fish at May 19, 2010 04:52 PM (M5t+h)
I was selfless. That Teet Defensive was no picnic though.
Posted by: Obligatory Dick Blumenthal at May 19, 2010 04:53 PM (8OTio)
Posted by: Adriane at May 19, 2010 04:53 PM (mXBw3)
--snapdragon is infiltrating!
Posted by: logprof at May 19, 2010 04:53 PM (Mmw0q)
Posted by: sifty at May 19, 2010 04:54 PM (P8eW0)
Posted by: Charlie Gibson at May 19, 2010 04:54 PM (4y0YU)
Its pretty damn clear, they just dont want to face the fact that the majority of the people of the nation are waking up and have no desire to see our country become a socialist p.c. liberal utopia dystopia.
The movement is defined by its followers desiring to return this nation to the principles of its founders whether that means Democrats and Republicans alike have to purged from every institution of government to achieve it.
Posted by: Blazer at May 19, 2010 04:55 PM (t72+4)
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 04:56 PM (8OTio)
Muslims have flocked to the Democrats over the War on Terror and
Republican support for Israel, which puts them at odds with Jews who
have long called the leftward party home.
So -- what foreign policy does someone vote for when he votes Democratic?
Anti-American foreign policy that demonizes Israel. The self-hating Jews in the Democratic party are all for that just like the muslims. No contradiction, there.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 19, 2010 04:57 PM (Qp4DT)
murdering George Bush in effigy = free speech! Truth to power!
murdering Sarah Palin = free speech! Down with Christofascism!
Burning a cardboard Obama = investigation by the local police, the Secret Service, and the NAACP (!)
...and a beer says the bar owner's home gets vandalized before Sunday and a second says her liquor license gets revoked.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 19, 2010 04:57 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 19, 2010 04:58 PM (OkT2m)
Republicans: "Confront the threat."
Libertarians: "There is no threat."
Democrats: "The threat is America."
Posted by: Noel at May 19, 2010 04:58 PM (Hh13R)
Posted by: Rick Bayless, celebrity WH chef for the Mexican state dinner at May 19, 2010 04:59 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: Dr Spank at May 19, 2010 04:59 PM (SbFur)
Posted by: Unclefacts, AoSHQ Professional Debate Team at May 19, 2010 05:00 PM (erIg9)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:00 PM (r0Zl3)
Posted by: Monty at May 19, 2010 05:01 PM (O3eFQ)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 05:01 PM (UOM48)
#21
Michael Finley is a basketball player. Cmon morons. He has aged well. I didn't know he was born in 1951. And a black man to take on David Duke like that....selfless.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 05:01 PM (8OTio)
Michael Kinsely is a graduate of Harvard, but you would never know after listening to his sophisticated elitist preening about the superiority of liberal governance. What a dick.
Posted by: Fish at May 19, 2010 05:01 PM (M5t+h)
That might be what tips me off.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 19, 2010 05:03 PM (OkT2m)
Conservatives: "Confront the threat."
Libertarians: "There is no threat."
Democrats: "The threat is America."
Posted by: O'Blammo at May 19, 2010 05:03 PM (PCUu5)
lol, that's what I was thinking. Except it's Alfred Kinsey you're thinking of.
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 19, 2010 05:03 PM (c0A3e)
Seriously, The Huffington Post and The Crap-lantic should just merge. I haven't been able to tell the difference between the two for a good while now.
Posted by: Blazer at May 19, 2010 05:03 PM (t72+4)
Posted by: Dr Spank at May 19, 2010 08:59 PM (SbFur)
Yeah. Great work, but I would have like to have seen it saved for someone more important, like Rick Astley. Or maybe LOLcats.
Posted by: Editor at May 19, 2010 05:04 PM (YX6i/)
Kinsley besides being irrelavent is full of shit.
The year before the draft ended there were anywhere from 300,000 to 1,000,000 protestors on the capital mall. The next year after the draft ended there were 35,000.
The Vietnam protests were the I'm too scared to go crowd. Once they didn't have to they seemed to find something else to do on protest day.
Posted by: robtr at May 19, 2010 05:04 PM (fwSHf)
This word "know". I do not think it means what you think it means.
Posted by: Inigo Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:04 PM (r0Zl3)
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 19, 2010 05:05 PM (Qwdkj)
That Kinsley article puts me in mind of a Bob Weir TV interview in which the dude with a straight face claimed that folks in the 60's did drugs 'to better understand the world' rather merely 'for a buzz' like 'kids today'. Jagov.
Posted by: Bill Carson at May 19, 2010 05:05 PM (DluvF)
Posted by: kansas at May 19, 2010 05:05 PM (2kVkH)
Seriously, Michael Kinsely invented the 10-inch strap-on, and Elana Kagan, Margaret Cho, and Rosie O'Donell have been forever grateful. I believe this to be true, but caution advised as the facts could be as loose as a liberal blogger's lips.
Posted by: Fish at May 19, 2010 05:06 PM (M5t+h)
Reconcile? Why?
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:06 PM (r0Zl3)
So, let me get this straight: the Tea Partiers are made up of essentially ordinary, middle class Americans who want limited government, adherence to the Constitution, and would prefer to not be taxed to perdition trying to maintain socialist domestic policies. They have not burned anyone in effigy, certainly haven't thrown any bombs, and tend to even pick up their trash (that they seem to bathe regularly and not engage in public acts of free love or waste elimination seems to be a given). They aren't a "serious political movement"; they are merely engaging in a bit of tantrum throwing, with the insinuation that their movement is based on fancy and will come to naught.
But dirty, patchouli reeking, bop like goats in public (heck, bop a goat in public), rock throwing, pot huffing, acid dropping hippies were serious young men and women of valor and rectitude who stood for a clear, noble cause that actually won in the end (thanks to all that heavy lifting and noble rectitudiness and seriousness)?
WTF?! Who the heck switched my country out from under me when I wasn't looking and replaced it with this?
I want to go down to the coffee shop and kick a hippie now...or a hipster if the former can't be found; I'm not picky.
Posted by: unknown jane at May 19, 2010 05:06 PM (5/yRG)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 05:06 PM (UOM48)
Ah, there it is. You only distrust the Panopticon state because you're ignorant.
Posted by: Ace's liver at May 19, 2010 05:07 PM (XIXhw)
@ Monty
I talk to leftists...friends or not, and I'm often amazed how little we agree on ANYTHING. A divided country is a cliche but true. I think I have more in common politically with Austrailian Bushmen than I do with some of my own family, friends, and neighbors.
I'm not that old but I (think?) can remember a time when most people shared the same ends, if not the means to it. Now, not so much.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 05:07 PM (8OTio)
Fuck those bitches.
Posted by: Michelle Obama at May 19, 2010 05:07 PM (r0Zl3)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at May 19, 2010 05:07 PM (a9UO0)
Posted by: Thomas at May 19, 2010 05:07 PM (JmKOX)
That hot young thing Cindy Sheehan, and her young hot friends in Code Pink?
I'd hit it !
Posted by: Michael "The Worm" Kinsley at May 19, 2010 05:09 PM (sYxEE)
Posted by: Thomas at May 19, 2010 09:07 PM (JmKOX)
No only the goofy glasses, but he did the voice overs for Howdy Doody.
Posted by: Fish at May 19, 2010 05:09 PM (M5t+h)
Nice work cribbing from Obama's commencement speech. Obviously he put as little thought into what he wrote as President Krazy Glue did: is he seriously saying criticism of government is illegitimate in a democracy?
What a fucking retard.
Posted by: Waterhouse at May 19, 2010 05:09 PM (cBHtc)
You have seen Kinsely yes? His chances of making through the physically seem ... unlikely. But, stranger things have happened. Maybe he's really wirey.
Posted by: damian at May 19, 2010 05:10 PM (4WbTI)
Posted by: Locus Ceruleus at May 19, 2010 05:10 PM (tzcjs)
Posted by: Bill Carson at May 19, 2010 05:10 PM (DluvF)
Posted by: sifty at May 19, 2010 05:10 PM (P8eW0)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at May 19, 2010 05:11 PM (a9UO0)
You do.
2 Thessalonians 3:10--"For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat."
Bushmen understand that. Utopians don't. You have a culture. They don't. Simple.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:11 PM (r0Zl3)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 05:11 PM (UOM48)
I CAN HAZ TAXMONEYZ?
Posted by: Oldcat at May 19, 2010 09:08 PM (z1N6a)
Let the meme begin.
Posted by: Editor at May 19, 2010 05:11 PM (YX6i/)
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 05:12 PM (r07cb)
Not exactly Ayn Rand heroes in their ability to buck their herd.
Posted by: damian at May 19, 2010 05:12 PM (4WbTI)
Posted by: fluffy at May 19, 2010 05:12 PM (SwkdU)
Interestingly, that was the whole point of the Constitution that this nation is founded on. Kinksley, and his Hah-vahd scumbag brethren don't like that.
-->The Tea Party movement has been compared (by David Brooks of The New York Times, among others) to the student protest movement of the 1960s. Even though one came from the left and the other from the right, both are/were, or at least styled themselves as, a mass challenge to an oppressive establishment.
Who was coming from the right, there? The Tea Parties are nothing like the protesting scumbags of the 60's, who were out to destroy America, not save it.
-->First, the 1960s (shorthand for all of the political and social developments we associate with that period) were by, for, and about young people. The Tea Party movement is by, for, and about middle-aged and old people (undoubtedly including more than a few who were part of the earlier movement too). If young people discover a cause and become a bit overwrought or monomaniacal, thatÂ’s easily forgiven as part of the charm of youth. When adults of middle age and older throw tantrums and hold their breath until they turn blue, itÂ’s less charming.
The wisdom of maturity and the naivete and stupidity of youth is lost on Kinksley. No big surprise, as he is a pretty stupid character. I can't read any more of this retard. He's too stupid for words, really. A typical Hah-vahd man, though. Not very bright, but full of himself, nonetheless.
If Hah-vahd burned to the ground, the US would benefit greatly.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 19, 2010 05:12 PM (Qp4DT)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 09:06 PM (UOM4
I'm in the process of cleaning my monitor. That was funny.
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 19, 2010 05:12 PM (YVZlY)
Posted by: Bill Carson at May 19, 2010 09:10 PM (DluvF)
And we didn't want the fucks in Vietnam either. Between the pot smokin', reach arounds, and whiny "mommy help me" letters home, they were as useless as SnapDragon's liberal retorts.
Posted by: Fish at May 19, 2010 05:13 PM (M5t+h)
Posted by: Editor at May 19, 2010 05:13 PM (YX6i/)
Posted by: fluffy at May 19, 2010 09:12 PM (SwkdU)
--I didn't click the link. Did you?
Posted by: logprof at May 19, 2010 05:14 PM (Mmw0q)
Posted by: sifty at May 19, 2010 05:14 PM (P8eW0)
Posted by: Phil at May 19, 2010 05:14 PM (jr7Cb)
Libertarians: "There is no threat."
Democrats: "The threat is America."
Thread winner.
Posted by: OregonMuse at May 19, 2010 05:14 PM (trjej)
That selfless concern for the poooorrr Vietnamese with the protests and the like ended oh so coincidentally with the end of the draft and the pullout of troops starting in 1973
But The Worm loves like his fellow Boomer leftists to believe that they oozed virtue
Posted by: kbdabear at May 19, 2010 05:14 PM (sYxEE)
Indeed!
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 19, 2010 05:14 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: Editor at May 19, 2010 09:13 PM (YX6i/)
Damn Editor your arms must be killing you.
Posted by: robtr at May 19, 2010 05:15 PM (fwSHf)
No. You're selfish for keeping the blinds shut.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:16 PM (r0Zl3)
When I call you a lefty elitist douchebag geek Mikey, it's only because I care about you so much!
Posted by: kbdabear at May 19, 2010 05:16 PM (sYxEE)
Posted by: The War Between the Undead States at May 19, 2010 05:16 PM (s5x7J)
The wisdom of maturity and the naivete and stupidity of youth is lost on Kinksley. No big surprise, as he is a pretty stupid character.
Ain't that the truth. Leftists are childlike in their beliefs. Only a wonderful country could shield so many from reality for so long. Times are a changin though...
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 05:16 PM (8OTio)
OK after a weekend nap, you come back strong.
Kinsely use to have a little sense. I enjoyed reading him when he worked at the new republic, OK I read the enemy.
Now? He is so full of shit he can't get a gig at MSNDC. Remember when he was a regular?
I like the guy, but I think he has started to suck dicks.
Ghey usually works with MSDNC, but he must have pissed someone off.
One word.
Swallow.
I guess he didn't and the producer cut him.
Posted by: Kemp at May 19, 2010 05:17 PM (2+9Yx)
You're just unpatriotic scum according to slow Joe.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at May 19, 2010 05:17 PM (CwfEA)
But The Worm loves like his fellow Boomer leftists to believe that they oozed virtue
Posted by: kbdabear at May 19, 2010 09:14 PM (sYxEE)
Bullshit, it started ending in 1969 when we went from the draft to a lottery and ended altoghether by 1972.
Posted by: robtr at May 19, 2010 05:17 PM (fwSHf)
Yes, of course, these are gripes against the government, not against the country itself. But that distinction becomes hard to maintain
Um, no, it doesn't.
Posted by: pep at May 19, 2010 05:17 PM (0K3p3)
A pullout they masterminded as stooges of the KGB, which left millions of SE Asians to die under the Communists, and for which the lefty sacks of boomer shit have never taken the first bit of responsibility for their moral perfidy.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:18 PM (r0Zl3)
That's right, and here is where it starts:
Liberal/statist: The government gives me a right to free speech:
Conservative/libertarian: The government may not take away the right to free speech I already have.
And therein is a world of difference.
Posted by: OregonMuse at May 19, 2010 05:18 PM (trjej)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at May 19, 2010 05:18 PM (a9UO0)
Kinksley: "At bottom, this is a suspicion not of government but of democracy. After all, who elected this monster?"
Answered by his good buddy (no doubt) Evan Thomas: "Have you ever seen a victory speech where there was no one else on stage? No adoring wife, no cute kid -- he is the message. ... There is a slightly creepy cult of personality about all of this."
These leftists love jerking each other off as they destroy our nation.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 19, 2010 05:19 PM (Qp4DT)
Conservative/libertarian: The government may not take away the right to free speech I already have. Bang!
FIFY
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:20 PM (r0Zl3)
The constitution of the old USSR granted citizens a right to "free speech". It did not recognize it as intrinsic, preexisting, and transcending governmental authority.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at May 19, 2010 05:21 PM (CwfEA)
Posted by: Monty at May 19, 2010 05:21 PM (O3eFQ)
Posted by: huerfano at May 19, 2010 05:22 PM (Updet)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 05:23 PM (UOM48)
A constitutional amendment enacted by a supermajority is some kind of parlor trick. But one cooked up by five liberal justices is sacrosanct and inviolable!
"Apart from a general funk, though, the one common theme espoused by TPPs is the monstrous danger of Big Government."
I don't know General Funk, except for Bootsy, but General Washington & Co. espoused themes such as
"Congress shall make no law"
'the right of the people shall not be infringed'
'retained by the people'
'reserved to the States or to the people', etc.
In short, "the monstrous danger of Big Government".
Posted by: Noel at May 19, 2010 05:23 PM (Hh13R)
alex , you know better . The money you make serves others far better than it can serve you .
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at May 19, 2010 09:18 PM (a9UO0)
My motto is give until it hurts...
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 19, 2010 05:23 PM (YVZlY)
Every April 30 I commit an act of disloyalty to this country. I take down the Stars and Stripes and fly a South Viet Namese flag given to my father by his best friend, a SV Colonel.
I hope a hippy has choked on his bong just seeing it.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:24 PM (r0Zl3)
Posted by: Purple Avenger at May 19, 2010 09:11 PM
You'd be scared too if like Mikey you spent your entire life being afraid to go to the bathroom because the horrible memories of those royal flushes and atomic wedgies from your youth left you scarred.
Posted by: kbdabear at May 19, 2010 05:24 PM (sYxEE)
That was nice, Ace. As Jonah might say, it's a pinata so full of asininity, it can be whacked from any angle.
Here's one. Moral hubris underpinned everything they did. ("Their essence was selfless and idealistic: stopping the war; ending racism; eradicating poverty.") It was at least as much about them proclaiming their superiority than it was about them trying to make a valid, sound point or two, probably moreso. So this is Kinsley doing more of that, jerking off to his own enlightened attitude. Kind of like Frank Rich every week.
One personal anecdote, my family spent time in Aspen every year during the 60's, fishing and camping. Aspen was just a truck stop on the way to Glenwood Springs back then. Then the chosen showed up in the late 60's, the boomer hippies. They broadcasted their moral superiority in every way imaginable, even if that meant walking into your camp uninvited because they were so damned awesome. Summer of '69 was the last time we camped. We skiied there through 70's. The whole time, it was the same. "Hey, man, we are so with-it, and you are so not."
Within another decade, they owned everything there, and they fought and scrabbled for every piece of the pie they could, got rich and greedy--but they were still our betters. Because it was okay for them to be rich and greedy. They were enlightened. Not for us. We were deemed greedy, because we weren't part of the pack. But the reality is, we were never as insanely money grubbing and class conscious as them.
Back in '69, we gave them food, supplies, and fishing and camping gear, because they had no idea what they were doing. But we never could have expected any degree of graciousness or generousity in return at any point thereafter from any of them. Just attitude from tight in-groupers.
They were better than us. Just ask Kinsley.
That duality is disgusting. If you're homeless, go pitch a tent on someone's 500 acre ranch, and see how long you get to live off the land. If you're wealthy, go and try to make friends. (Actually, if you're super-wealthy, well, you do fit in at that point.)
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 19, 2010 05:24 PM (Qwdkj)
Posted by: runningrn at May 19, 2010 05:25 PM (CfmlF)
Kinksley isn't smart, at all. He's got a mediocre mind. He's been spewing gibberish like this for most of his working life.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 19, 2010 05:25 PM (Qp4DT)
Posted by: bergerbilder at May 19, 2010 05:25 PM (S1Ttj)
#89
You talkin to me?
Good news, I've been sober for 9 months!
Lying will only get you more dick sucking.
That would be Dick Nixon's dick.
On that thing, you drunk bastard.
Posted by: Satan at May 19, 2010 05:25 PM (2+9Yx)
"it was a point when the adults made a conscious decision to keep acting like children."
Yeah, folks en masse decided to act like perpetual fucking adolescents, intent on tearing down the very system they were counting on to bail them out.
Posted by: Bill Carson at May 19, 2010 05:26 PM (DluvF)
Posted by: GarandFan at May 19, 2010 05:26 PM (6mwMs)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at May 19, 2010 05:26 PM (a9UO0)
Yeah. No. If I want to blow my paycheck on pizza, stompy boots, books and porn, that's my business.
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 05:27 PM (r07cb)
Reminds me of that line someone on tv said once.. I think it was Mr Burns
Q. How do you sleep at night?
A. On a big pile of money
Posted by: kbdabear at May 19, 2010 05:27 PM (sYxEE)
Posted by: bergerbilder at May 19, 2010 05:28 PM (S1Ttj)
Posted by: Ronster at May 19, 2010 05:28 PM (tAmmU)
Posted by: bergerbilder at May 19, 2010 09:28 PM (S1Ttj)
No but we can go with that if you want.
Posted by: robtr at May 19, 2010 05:29 PM (fwSHf)
Posted by: RushBabe at May 19, 2010 05:29 PM (W8m8i)
#97 @Monty
I'm in my early 30's. I guess I'm talking about the middle class white suburbs in Denver, Colorado. This to me is striking. Of course socialism and all sorts of other isms go back many decades, but I'm refering to my stomping grounds.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 05:29 PM (8OTio)
My own money? Say five. Your money? As many as I want, darling.
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 05:30 PM (r07cb)
Dear Mr. O'Spades,
It has come to our attention that you have used way more words on this post than you were allotted. As you know, in our quest for fairness, bandwidth and words are rationed to all you so called "bloggers". Your verbosity and rambling musings pose a real threat to freedom and democracy here in America. We ask that you ammend this post and truncate it to "misguided war."
Thank you for attention to this matter. This sure is a nice blog. It would be a shame for something to happen to it.
Sincerely,
Your Friends at the FEC
Posted by: Your Friends at the FEC at May 19, 2010 05:30 PM (CfmlF)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 05:31 PM (7JES6)
Gee dipshit, did all of those Obama voters know who they were voting for? No, and they still don't
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (IqfKc)
My own money? Say five. Your money? As many as I want, darling.
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 09:30 PM (r07cb)
That was hot. Entirely expected, of course, but hot.
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (r0Zl3)
1968-72 is when the New Left took over the Democratic Party, and since that time, it's been war. That's what the "reach across the aisle" types McCain either can't or won't understand.
Posted by: OregonMuse at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (trjej)
Posted by: Monty at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (O3eFQ)
OT: No fucking way it could be translated this poorly. More bullshit by the minute: State visit marred by poor translation...: http://bit.ly/dqUTkP
But the English translation that American viewers heard was so bad that the official White House transcript ignored it. Instead the White House used a translation provided by the Mexican Embassy and it was markedly different from the words actually spoken by the translator as Calderon talked.
For example, here's how Calderon's comments on the tough new immigration law in Arizona were rendered by his translator during the opening ceremony:
"We can do so with a community that will promote a dignified life and an orderly way for both our countries, who are, some of them, still living here in the shadows with such laws as the Arizona law that is placing our people to face discrimination."
And here's how those same comments appeared in the official transcript issued later Wednesday:
"I know that we share the interest in promoting dignified, legal and orderly living conditions to all migrant workers. Many of them, despite their significant contribution to the economy and to the society of the United States, still live in the shadows and, occasionally, as in Arizona, they even face discrimination."
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (YVZlY)
How to find a new audience, reinvent yourself as a KOS kid?
That all I can figure, since he use to be sane.
Now? WTF, too much kool aid.
Posted by: Kemp at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (2+9Yx)
They like the wealthy. They don't like the people who are trying to become wealthy. How DARE we.
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 19, 2010 05:32 PM (OkT2m)
My opinion as to why Tim Burns lost.
Tim Burns ran a republican, Critz ran as a conservative.
(Critz even had an ad saying Burns endorsed the VAT tax.)
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-democrat at May 19, 2010 05:33 PM (ACkhT)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 05:34 PM (UOM48)
Slaughtered SE Asians? Never heard of them
Posted by: Walter Cronkite at May 19, 2010 05:34 PM (sYxEE)
O/T Obama on Chatroulette- funny stuff. He really isn't too popular anymore. The commenters on the typical liberal online shit like Newsbleak or La times are all anti-Obama. What are the Probama commenters saying?
Posted by: S'norin desert at May 19, 2010 05:34 PM (yVg/C)
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-democrat at May 19, 2010 05:35 PM (ACkhT)
Posted by: Bill D. Cat at May 19, 2010 05:35 PM (a9UO0)
Nope, they don't count, they were the "wrong" type of Asians.
And people like John F'ng Kerry were saying that only "30,000" people would be displaced after S. Vietnam falls.
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 19, 2010 05:37 PM (c0A3e)
Oh hey meant to tell you I got a new umbrella.
But the thing that got me the most were the girls out of combat school, in the cold, with their sexy shoes and sandals. Girls know what's important to them.
Yup. I'm generally pragmatic with shoes and clothing but I froze in order to wear my cute new racktastic top when I went to dinner the other night. I have my priorities.
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 05:38 PM (r07cb)
Posted by: Monty at May 19, 2010 05:38 PM (O3eFQ)
Taking things from you and I.
The primary difference between the two is that the Democrats party wants your money and the left wants your freedoms.
Once you understand this dynamic, it all makes sense. WoT bad under Bush, good under Obama? Corporatism bad when Bush was flirting with it and good when Obama goes full Massa on it? Etc...etc...etc...
Posted by: 18-1 at May 19, 2010 05:38 PM (bgcml)
This Obama dipshit is toast in 2012.
I'll still be proud of the stand I am taking with the Tea Party movement.
Posted by: sifty at May 19, 2010 05:39 PM (P8eW0)
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 09:38 PM (r07cb)
and we thank you for that...
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 19, 2010 05:40 PM (YVZlY)
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 19, 2010
09:37 PM (c0A3e)
Damn bastards deserved it. Even though, uh, the communists never killed anyone in Southeast Asia after the evil Americans left.
Posted by: Noam Chompsky at May 19, 2010 05:40 PM (bgcml)
They weren't just liberals; that was par for the course. No, they were the obnoxious, smug, fart-sniffing liberals. I hated those fuckers like poison.
Heh. Ayup. I know them.
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 19, 2010 05:41 PM (Qwdkj)
Michael Kinsely?
Like what the fuck would Michael Kinsely know about my life or my beliefs?
When I was drafted in 1966 I went, served my two, never went across the pond, and when I came home I mourned the friends I lost. Still mourn them.
This putz can go pound sand.
Posted by: solitary knight at May 19, 2010 05:41 PM (3HxtL)
You just described the hamptons. My parents remember pristine farmland and beautiful beaches and then they came with their mcmansions and their "society" and all of a sudden the regular people who had lived there for generations were unable to even buy a house. They are no going after the North Fork, the other side and the people are worried. Let them have their two hour ride on a two lane road to get to their mcmansion on the other side, the hamptons side, but leave the north fork alone.
Posted by: curious at May 19, 2010 05:41 PM (p302b)
@27: "There is such a difference in outlook, in basic principles, between the leftist/statist bloc and the conservative/libertarian bloc, that I can't imagine how they will ever be able to reconcile."
The Dems and the GOP, being largely statists, will reconcile, primarily by becoming more Lefty. The conservatives and libertarians, being few in number and utterly disorganized will be crushed. Simple.
Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at May 19, 2010 05:42 PM (kmEfr)
Posted by: Monty
Monty,
You sound like a normal guy. Usually when you write,, I visualize you in a smoking jacket, with pipe, in the music room at Versailles.
Posted by: mpfs, Kia Hamster Fan at May 19, 2010 05:43 PM (QuP9W)
Posted by: alexthechick
Sometimes you just have to show the gals off regardless of the circumstances!
Posted by: mpfs, Kia Hamster Fan at May 19, 2010 05:45 PM (QuP9W)
Posted by: tsj017 at May 19, 2010 05:45 PM (TO4Pw)
#140 @Monty
Heh. the Boulderites are still the same. Nothing has changed. Downtown is much better though. Coors Field and gentrification changed it. The CIA is still there.
The King Soopers at 9th and Corona is still known as "Queen Soopers".
And I agree, I'd rather be around crackheads and trannies than Boulder libs. They are truly insufferable.
Luckily, I grew up in the south suburbs. Now live in a gentrified part of Denver though.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 05:47 PM (8OTio)
You have seen Kinsely yes? His chances of making through the physically seem ... unlikely. But, stranger things have happened. Maybe he's really wirey.
- Forget the draft. You forget the biggest reason for a 17 year old male to embrace the "movement." Free love. The boys of that whole generation didn't stand a chocolate kettle's chance. This country will be better off once the boomers start dying out. Trust me.
Posted by: dEWy at May 19, 2010 05:48 PM (EEa0I)
Posted by: Monty at May 19, 2010 05:49 PM (O3eFQ)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 05:49 PM (EA+Co)
Lol. We need more "fisticuffs" and such in these times. Seriously, I love your writing.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 19, 2010 05:51 PM (UOM48)
That's because I used my real name when I wrote in the snow.
What?
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 19, 2010 05:52 PM (r0Zl3)
Then shit is gonna get real ugly.
They can't help themselves.
The scared and desperate conglomeration of druggies, communists, perverts, foreign operatives, losers, racists, common violent criminals, mobsters, union thugs, anarchists, psychotics, mental defectives, journalice, freeloaders, jihadis, snapdragons, and anti-Semites that is forming now on the left won't be able to control themselves until the elections. They are terrified that Momma Washington's tit is gonna be jerked out of their mouth.
Some leftist asshole is going to blow the game, they always do.
Posted by: sifty at May 19, 2010 05:53 PM (P8eW0)
Amusingly, I was out for dinner with Boy BFF and we were discussing the plans for his upcoming wedding. I finally said "stop staring at them" and he replied "but they're right THERE". I could not argue with that logic.
Posted by: alexthechick at May 19, 2010 05:54 PM (r07cb)
Posted by: Monty at May 19, 2010 05:55 PM (O3eFQ)
#163 Monty
I remember going with my Dad to the dump, south of County Line Road. That dump is now part of Highlands Ranch.
Yes, Parker, I believe was the fastest growing town in the country in the 90's. Might have been Douglas County though. Like you say, just another suburb now.
I've gotten gas there, but never had a chili cheeseburger...I'll have to remember that.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at May 19, 2010 05:59 PM (8OTio)
Maybe that is the problem?
Posted by: curious at May 19, 2010 06:01 PM (p302b)
Posted by: curious at May 19, 2010 06:02 PM (p302b)
curious: and all of a sudden the regular people who had lived there for generations were unable to even buy a house.
Yeah. There was a lot of cheap, cheap land when we first went there. We just wanted to visit, though. It was beautiful, and, until '69, when we camped we wouldn't see anyone for a week--except a marshall. There was always a single marshall who would check in once each time. We stopped because of their noise and intrusiveness. But, hey, they were one-with-the-land. We weren't.
Later, when we did own land, we couldn't get a plan approved. You "had to go through the right channels," so to speak, in that newly formed people's republic. Our architect was brilliant, but he wasn't with one of the local firms. We could have taken the plan to a local, had him xerox it for a shitload of money, and badabing, no problems. In fact, one person on the building commission actually told us to go to one of his pals. That conflict of interest was actionable, of course, but he was probably best friends with the judge too. And all the other bureaucrats.
When you're enlightened and morally superior, little ethical considerations like that--and legal ones--are too miniscule to bother with. Anyway. The politics were too obvious, ugly, and unpleasant. So we didn't. We didn't want to fight.
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 19, 2010 06:02 PM (Qwdkj)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 06:03 PM (EA+Co)
Yes, just like Clinton wiped out the deficit, Obama will do it again.
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:06 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: damian at May 19, 2010 06:06 PM (4WbTI)
Posted by: red speck at May 19, 2010 06:08 PM (/vfpn)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 06:09 PM (EA+Co)
I thought it was bad enough when their fucking grandchildren decided to revive the 70's for us. I could live with the horrible clothes and the formulaic pop music but when they revived the Zombie Carter administration with Papa Barack as its head voudon, that's when I decided to outlive them all.
Here's hoping the Zombie Carters produce a Zombie Reagan for 2012 so we can all relive our coke habits and fat bank accounts from the 80's. The hair-metal bands will be a small price to pay for rediscovering prosperity.
Posted by: societyis2blame at May 19, 2010 06:15 PM (7ZyYf)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 10:10 PM (jNrXp)
LOL. To liberals, Kinksley is an intellectual. Then again, to liberals, Mr. "profit and earnings ratios", Mr. "reduce premiums by 3000%" has a brain.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at May 19, 2010 06:15 PM (Qp4DT)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:17 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:20 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:23 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:25 PM (jNrXp)
Rednecks vs. "intellectuals", Palin-smack. Yawn.
Keep talking, liars. We don't even need to respond. Keep talking until even the most mind-numbed militantly-uninformed "independent" pukes at the sound of your voice.
November's gonna be a bitch 4 u.
Posted by: societyis2blame at May 19, 2010 06:26 PM (7ZyYf)
Posted by: actual intellectuals with ideas and stuff at May 19, 2010 06:28 PM (4WbTI)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 06:32 PM (7JES6)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:34 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: damian at May 19, 2010 06:36 PM (4WbTI)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:37 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: Bill Carson at May 19, 2010 06:40 PM (DluvF)
Posted by: Bill Carson at May 19, 2010 06:42 PM (DluvF)
I noticed Walter's emissions get ignored at Mother Jones's comment boards, which is perhaps why he deigns to stop by here; even negative attention is better than complete disdain from one's proggy buddies........
Posted by: Sort-of-Mad Max at May 19, 2010 06:45 PM (2PTT7)
(curious at May 19, 2010 09:41 PM (p302b) )
"There ain't no island left for islanders like me..."
Yeah, I know Billy Joel can afford it, but the sentiment is still righ5t. I had friends living on Fisher's Island till it became off limits, money-wise.
Block Island too.
Posted by: flashbazzbo, s.e. at May 19, 2010 06:45 PM (x7MwC)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at May 19, 2010 06:46 PM (eNxMU)
First off I love it when you take this approach, taking a column and skewering it paragraph by paragraph. Kinda like the guys at firejoemorgan.com used to do in the sports world, only a hell of a lot more meaningful. Anyway, it's effective.
Regarding the recent theme that tea partiers are selfish....no they are not. They are, generally speaking, the direct opposite. What drives a significant portion of the dissent are the things that will happen long after they/we are six feet under. To your point, the hippies were focused on what would happen in the here and now - their immediate futures. Tea partiers hold on to the quaint notion that we should be leaving future generations in better shape than we found it. This is the primary driver behind the movement as far as I can tell, which is anything but selfish.
In a sense, tea partiers are saving the younger generation from themselves. Like 40+ years ago (generally speaking), the younger generation is focused on the here and now. It makes some sense. They pay a hundred thousand or more for their educations, and can't even land entry level jobs for their efforts. Unfortunately many of them are economically illiterate, so they don't understand that gov't intervention and higher taxes don't help their cause in the least and will, in fact, saddle them with high taxes and limited growth for decades down the road.
They aren't being benevolent, they're just naive. The tea partiers, on the other hand, have seen where this is heading and are most worried about what they're handing their kids and grandkids.
I just realized I sound really old. I'm not that old, only 35, but I've seen enough to know that excessive government interference inevitably sets up a bigger shitstorm down the road.
Posted by: Dave S at May 19, 2010 06:49 PM (UvR6d)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 06:56 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 06:58 PM (73jUp)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 07:00 PM (73jUp)
It's useful if one of the table legs is short.
Posted by: damian at May 19, 2010 07:01 PM (4WbTI)
I had friends living on Fisher's Island till it became off limits, money-wise.
Funny thing is, when you reach a certain level of wealth--outrageously wealthy--it doesn't matter if the money is new. You fit right in. I knew someone on another forum who lucked into Microsoft money. (Of course, for her, it was their brilliance made them rich.) Anyway, this new money moved to the Hamptons and, by all reports, seemed to fit right in. Odd, that. Well, maybe not, if the majority of your neighbors are in the same new boat.
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 19, 2010 07:04 PM (Qwdkj)
Dennis Prager bemoaned the paucity of deep thought on the left. He even debated Howard Zinn and found his opponent's arguments shallow. Why I expect more, I don't know.
Posted by: Soon-to-be-Ex-ExZonie at May 19, 2010 07:05 PM (zzP3l)
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 07:13 PM (jNrXp)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 07:13 PM (7JES6)
Let's do this! I can go all night!
Posted by: raykon at May 19, 2010 07:17 PM (jNrXp)
They've so internalized hypocrisy as a lifestyle that they can participate in it and accuse others of it in the same breath without even realizing the irony.
Posted by: Merovign, Strong On His Mountain at May 19, 2010 07:19 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 07:19 PM (7JES6)
Fixed it for him.
Posted by: Brendan at May 19, 2010 07:33 PM (2jQGY)
Posted by: publicserf at May 19, 2010 07:34 PM (q9MEa)
OMG, just last week, I saw my neighbour running up the deficit!
(Late to the party, as always.)
Posted by: chique d'afrique (the African chick formerly known as african chick) at May 19, 2010 07:37 PM (eNTMO)
Posted by: Soon-to-be-Ex-ExZonie at May 19, 2010 07:48 PM (zzP3l)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 07:49 PM (73jUp)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 07:52 PM (73jUp)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 07:54 PM (73jUp)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at May 19, 2010 08:05 PM (PQY7w)
Posted by: dfcvbcb at May 19, 2010 08:09 PM (n2yDq)
If y'all don't remember Monty's "Enigma machine" posts as J-Dog Stalin, Boss of Bosses, you have no idea just how insane he really is.
Holy shit that was some funny stuff.
Oh, also Michael Kinsley is pushing water uphill with a stick. Very hard to do.
Posted by: Dave in Texas at May 19, 2010 08:21 PM (Wh0W+)
Then shit is gonna get real ugly.
They can't help themselves.
The scared and desperate conglomeration of druggies, communists, perverts, foreign operatives, losers, racists, common violent criminals, mobsters, union thugs, anarchists, psychotics, mental defectives, journalice, freeloaders, jihadis, snapdragons, and anti-Semites that is forming now on the left won't be able to control themselves until the elections. They are terrified that Momma Washington's tit is gonna be jerked out of their mouth.
Some leftist asshole is going to blow the game, they always do.
Posted by: sifty at May 19, 2010 09:53 PM (P8eW0)
I LOL'd.
Posted by: Soon-to-be-Ex-ExZonie at May 19, 2010 09:05 PM (zzP3l)
Excellent, excellent fisking of a walking cloud of smug.
I was a little down from the elections yesterday, so it's good to see one of the intellectualoids of the opposition misread us so completely.
Posted by: motionview at May 19, 2010 09:08 PM (wrAuQ)
I’m late to the thread but I just want to contribute the fact that Michael Kinsley is an elitist hipster douchebag asshole. I speak from a slight bit of personal experience, him having been in the “sphere” of a certain company I worked for in the 90s, being all “hip” and “cool” and “cutting edge” with his bad self. He is one of those men that I have an overwhelming urge to punch on sight.
So, thank you Ace for ripping him a new one because it couldnÂ’t have happened to a nicer guy.
Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at May 19, 2010 09:12 PM (RZ8pf)
I'm up to this little nugget so far:
Kinsley: "When adults of middle age and older throw tantrums and hold their breath until they turn blue, itÂ’s less charming."
Yes, the likes of Ayers and assorted Alinskyites -- you know, the types who inhabit the Executive Branch now -- are just as charming now as they were a generation or so ago. Is that who this hack is talking about? It isn't? Why, I'm shocked. I was thinking the middle age and older crowd in the White House was a bit unbecoming in the tantrums they throw condemning the country.
Nice touch, too, for Kinsley to yank out the token David Brooks to validate his point. Why even Brooks, the only conservative Kinsley knows or thinks pointedly footnotable, equates the generationally separated protest against "the Man." Nevermind the protest movement of the 60's was largely pressed by hippies hopped up on locoweed and psychotropic love drugs while the elders of today in protest are pretty sane, mature, and, um, not-fucking-idiots.
There's just so much libero-literobabble to cover here it's hard to know where to stop.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 19, 2010 09:14 PM (swuwV)
america's health insurance companies fund the greatest advances and distribution of medical innovation in the history of mankind. not europe. not canada. not england. us. the u.s. the us of u.s.
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 11:19 PM (7JES6)
Gomm, how can insurance companies routinely deny care to their customers and also pay for sky-high medical care? How can they have a horrible product that people are somehow bamboozled into buying but yet the left is all DOCTOR-AmyBishop-Determined for every single person to have to buy that very product?
The mind boggles...
Posted by: Soon-to-be-Ex-ExZonie at May 19, 2010 09:16 PM (zzP3l)
Take up a hobby. Reading hacks like Kinsley destroys twice as many brain cells as Valu-Rite™ Vodka, with none of the hobo-bashing pleasure in return.
Posted by: Adjoran at May 19, 2010 09:17 PM (3hg5M)
Also, he's blind or ignorant to the fact that there are a large number of young tea partiers too. It's not just the middle age and the middle class. It gets my goat when we're ignored just because it's convenient to say that all under 40s are liberal.
In addition, it astounds me when my relatives say that they're not a part of the middle class. They'd be shocked to find out that not only are they middle class, they're pretty well entrenched in the middle class.
Posted by: soulpile at May 19, 2010 09:36 PM (afWhQ)
Jeeze, I wish Ace had reminded us of that in the title. I could've saved fisking time for something important.
Harvard U. - Handing out enough gentleman's A's to induce incalculable ZZZ's.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 19, 2010 09:38 PM (swuwV)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 09:38 PM (7JES6)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 09:53 PM (73jUp)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 09:57 PM (7JES6)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 10:08 PM (7JES6)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 10:11 PM (7JES6)
Kudos to you! You picked Kinsley's bone clean! In a good way, of course.
Posted by: kakypat at May 19, 2010 10:23 PM (b8jZZ)
Posted by: Aaron at May 19, 2010 10:27 PM (XUIJ5)
Posted by: gomm at May 19, 2010 10:31 PM (73jUp)
Posted by: Australian Economist at May 19, 2010 10:57 PM (zfRju)
Posted by: er at May 19, 2010 11:56 PM (dtJc/)
Posted by: Case at May 20, 2010 12:56 AM (0K+Kw)
Posted by: Asscheeks of Saturn at May 20, 2010 02:21 AM (w9bVp)
Posted by: BuddyPC at May 20, 2010 02:49 AM (N/Bgb)
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 19, 2010 11:04 PM (Qwdkj)
No surprise there, really. No matter how old the money, you can be sure that the mental disease called Liberalism destroys any semblance of good taste and breeding in those infected. All rich Liberals are, in the practical sense, neuvo riche. Naturally they are all clones of each other, both intellectually and aesthetically. Any "community" of Libs will be a collection of happy slaves - bound up in some Nazi-like home owners' association, or voluntarily living like they are. 3 approved car brands. 3 approved styles of vehicles within those brands. A uniform dress code with specified designers. And most critical - a binding and uniform set of ideas, held more sacred and inviolate than any religious order has held its dogma.
Posted by: Reactionary at May 20, 2010 04:20 AM (xUM1Q)
Posted by: cackfinger at May 20, 2010 04:29 AM (TUBcJ)
Ace and all you public school edumaplacated folk read : politically incorrect guide to vietnam war...to know WTF really went down.
thanks to 32 and 258 for thread nutshells
Posted by: redeemed at May 20, 2010 04:53 AM (mxcpd)
The left-minded thinkers (who used to be friends), as with Kinsley have called me self-indulgent, emotional and compared my intelligence to fat vs. lean people. Yes, it's true, that the leaner Founders were much smarter than say, a fat tea partier, ahem.
Just another example of how the LMT's believe themselves to be oh so superior to us little people. It is going to suck to be them when reality forces them to eat crow in order to get crow. While I am prepared for whatever comes and one of them knocks on my door, I wonder if they "will work for food?" Cause they aren't getting it any other way.
Posted by: DefendUSA at May 20, 2010 04:54 AM (yIwYC)
Posted by: maddogg at May 20, 2010 05:00 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: maddogg at May 20, 2010 05:02 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Alec Leamas at May 20, 2010 05:47 AM (IVQSY)
Posted by: Damn Skippy at May 20, 2010 06:07 AM (f7A+e)
Great post Ace.
"I seem to remember a shitload of "abstract resentment" and "intensity of feeling" on display among those anti-war activists -- who generally were activists for a whole smograstborg of trendy radical posture-politics"
Of course. I always looked for, but never found, any "Stop the Jihad" signs in those "Anti-War" protests.
Posted by: K~Bob at May 20, 2010 11:27 AM (9b6FB)
Posted by: Rewrite! at May 20, 2010 09:57 PM (d7Px0)
Posted by: orjin yüzbakým seti at March 05, 2011 11:06 AM (q3Ici)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.184 seconds, 390 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
--Do any of us really believe this will solve everything?
What a ass.
Posted by: logprof at May 19, 2010 04:50 PM (Mmw0q)